St. Patrick’s Church in Cottage Grove, Wisconsin / St. Patrick’s Facebook page
St. Louis, Mo., Apr 3, 2023 / 14:00 pm (CNA).
The Diocese of Madison clarified late last week that the Church does not endorse nor oppose specific political candidates after a Wisconsin pastor urged parishioners in his weekly parish bulletin message to vote against state Supreme Court candidate Janet Protasiewicz, who is openly pro-abortion.
“The Catholic Church’s involvement in public life doesn’t extend to endorsing candidates for election to public office nor calling for their defeat and thus refrains from partisan political activities. The Church does encourage voter registration and encourages Catholics, as citizens, to vote and to be civically engaged,” the diocese said in a statement sent to CNA.
“However, the Church also has both a duty and a right to call attention to the moral and religious dimensions of public issues, measuring social policies and political activities against the natural moral law and Gospel values. Since the first century, the Church has consistently affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law in its respect for all human life.”
The diocese’s response comes after Father Brian Dulli, pastor of St. Patrick’s Church in Cottage Grove, Wisconsin, urged his parishioners to vote against the pro-abortion candidate in Tuesday’s Wisconsin Supreme Court election, a race that observers say could have major effects on the legality of abortion in the state.
As reported by Wisconsin Public Radio, an attorney with the activist group Freedom from Religion Foundation, which is based in Madison, wrote to the IRS last week to complain about the bulletin, asking the IRS to revoke St. Patrick’s 501(c)3 nonprofit status.
The April 4 election is between former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Daniel Kelly and current Milwaukee judge Protasiewicz. Protasiewicz has spoken openly about her pro-abortion views while insisting that she has made “no promises” to pro-abortion groups that she will seek to overturn the state’s current abortion ban.
In a March 26 parish bulletin, Dulli urged Catholics not to vote for Protasiewicz, saying she has “tried to make this race entirely an effort to legalize abortion in the state of Wisconsin.”
“Abortion is the intentional taking of a human life. It is murder. Our Catholic faith is clear that this is grave sin. It should never be controversial among Catholics to say that you can never intentionally take any action that knowingly will help in the taking of a human life. You cannot publicly support abortion or abortion advocates and remain a Catholic in good standing,” Dulli wrote.
“As a Catholic, I urge you, for the salvation of your soul; do not vote for her [Protasiewicz] in the Supreme Court race on April 4,” he continued.
“I encourage you to study the race carefully and form you [sic] conscience correctly in accordance with the truths of the Catholic faith.”
In his April 2 bulletin message, Dulli acknowledged that the March 26 bulletin “got much more exposure than usual” and reiterated that “given a choice between any two people, we must say ‘absolutely not’ to the person who says abortion should be on the table.”
“We need to say no to a system that demands human sacrifice of the unborn be on the table. Jesus said that we will be judged by what we do to the least among us. Babies are the littlest and least. If someone consents to the killing of unborn children, they will not stop at the destruction of you or your family,” Dulli wrote.
“Haven’t we seen enough destruction now to know it?”
Reached by CNA on Monday, Dulli declined to comment further, saying he believes the situation has been “talked about enough.”
What’s Tuesday’s election all about?
The 2023 Wisconsin judicial race, which might have remained obscure in other years even within Wisconsin, is garnering national media attention and record fundraising numbers for the candidates. The reasons have to do with a prediction — both among pro-life and pro-abortion groups — that the winner of the election could tip the scales in Wisconsin when it comes to the state’s current abortion ban.
Wisconsin is the only state in the nation with a pre-Roe v. Wade abortion ban in effect, at least on paper. Wisconsin’s ban, which is contained in Section 940.04 of the Wisconsin Statutes and dates to 1849, allows abortion only to save the life of the mother. The state’s Democratic governor and attorney general have said they will not enforce the ban and are currently suing in an attempt to have it overturned.
The law was previously unenforceable following the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, but Roe’s overturning last year allowed the statute to come into effect. So far, it has not been blocked in court, as has happened with pre-Roe bans in West Virginia and Michigan.
Pro-abortion groups within and outside Wisconsin have identified the state Supreme Court race as the key to getting 940.04 overturned. Gov. Tony Evers, along with Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, announced a lawsuit last year to attempt to overturn the law, arguing that it has been superseded by subsequent legislation and cannot be enforced.
The lawsuit is likely to be ultimately decided by the state Supreme Court, which has had a 4-3 conservative majority for the past decade and a half. The current election will determine who will sit in the open seat being vacated by retiring conservative justice Patience Roggensack. The winner will serve a 10-year term.
Pro-life advocates worry that should the state Supreme Court obtain a pro-choice majority, the state’s pre-Roe ban could be declared unconstitutional, as happened last year in neighboring Michigan.
Who are the candidates?
Kelly is a former Wisconsin Supreme Court justice who served on the court from his appointment by then-Gov. Scott Walker in 2016 until he was voted out in 2020. He describes himself as a “constitutional conservative” and on his campaign website charges that his opponents are “judicial activists who seek to impose their own political agenda on our state.”
Amid a contentious campaign, Kelly has earned the endorsement of three statewide pro-life groups — Wisconsin Family Action, Pro-Life Wisconsin, and Wisconsin Right to Life. He said during a recent debate that his numerous endorsements from pro-life groups came about after having conversations with them about his pledge to uphold the Constitution, not because of any promise to keep the abortion ban in place.
In contrast, Protasiewicz has garnered endorsements from numerous top Democrats in Wisconsin as well as from pro-abortion groups such as NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and EMILY’s List. Protasiewicz currently is a judge for Branch 24 of the Milwaukee County Circuit Court in Wisconsin, having been elected to that court in 2014.
Protasiewicz has insisted she has made “no promises” to pro-abortion groups such as Planned Parenthood and EMILY’s List but also has made no bones about her pro-choice views. “My personal opinion is that [it] should be the woman’s right to make the reproductive health decisions, period,” she said during a March 21 debate.
What have Catholic leaders said?
At least two of the state’s bishops, including Bishop Donald Hying of Madison, have reiterated to Catholics that the right to life is a foundational issue that should form their consciences as they decide how to vote on Tuesday.
“Without the right to be born and to live, every other right is worthless,” Hying wrote in a March 30 letter.
“Do we want to live in a country that welcomes the wonder of every human life, supports marriages and families, helps the needy and suffering, seeks justice for all, and builds a civilization of love, or, do we want a society which aborts its children, leaves struggling parents without support, and lives a radical autonomy with no reference to the dignity of life and the common good? Do we elect civic leaders who stand on the unshakeable moral principle that every human life is sacred and of immeasurable worth, or, do we elect those who disregard the fundamental dignity of life and advocate for taking the life of the most innocent in the womb? Such questions we should ask ourselves as we exercise our moral and civic duty to vote.”
Archbishop Jerome Listecki of Milwaukee also issued a letter, dated March 28, urging Catholics to vote for candidates that uphold the right to life.
“The killing of the innocent has never been supported by Catholic Church teachings. As citizens, we have an obligation to support the laws that protect the innocent. We must take our responsibility, as citizens before God’s judgment, for the times we have supported the destruction of the innocent. We must also take responsibility for the lack of support for the protection of the innocent when we vote for candidates and laws that liberalize abortion laws,” Listecki wrote.
“There is nothing enlightened about an individual who fails to realize that the denial of the right to life for the most vulnerable among us is an attack on the dignity and personal value of every citizen. I could not and would not support a candidate whose position on life is contrary to the teachings of the Church — a position contrary to the teachings and love of Jesus.”
[…]
“I don’t bless a homosexual marriage, I bless two people who love each other and I also ask them to pray for me.” Ruffled at our hypocrisy, His Holiness sticks to his guns. Righteous indignation or moral schizophrenia?
Exploitive entrepreneurs, what about them he queries? Why the difference hypocrites? After all Francis suggests, these are loving people. Isn’t that all that matters? We can put aside disordered behavior, called an abomination that transgresses natural law, behavior Christ identifies unworthy of heaven.
Nonetheless, Francis’ logic follows that we should knowingly bless any and all sinners for their friendships, confirm the love they have for eachother, and ask them to pray for us. Surely novel and paradigmatic.
“Righteous indignation or moral schizophrenia?”
Rhetorical question?
Yes. The comment is a satire.
Once upon a time, public sinners were required to do public penance before their sins were absolved and they received sacramental grace -blessing public sinners without confession and penance is the ultimate “hypocrisy”.
Michael, there has to be at least a manifest desire or interest to repent. The priest can bless the good intent of a prospective penitent. My comment above is sarcasm, in the event it was misunderstood.
Exactly!
We read: “Pope Francis this week again defended the Vatican’s controversial document authorizing blessings for same-sex couples [!], with the Holy Father arguing that humans [persons as such?] ‘must all respect each other’ and stating that blessings should be extended to ‘everyone’.”
Everyone as in Every One? Working both sides of the street, he equates blessing of individual “persons” with blessing not of persons but of “couples.” Case in point:
“Always in confessions [individuals?], when these situations arrive, homosexual people, remarried people, I always pray and bless,” he continued. “The blessing [so now it IS a sacramental blessing?] is not to be denied to anyone [as in Any One?] Everyone, everyone [as in Every One?]. Mind you, I am talking about people: those [individual persons?] who are capable of receiving baptism” Francis continued [say what?].
As in blessing every prostitute and her pimp. Or every wifebeater committed to continuing with wifebeating and his submissive wife. wiWhat could be wrong with any of this?
It is now long witnessed how leftists in the secular and ostensibly “religious” realms level accusations against those who resist their deconstructionism with charges that perfectly characterize themselves.
Hypocrisy indeed…his lack of self awareness goes over the boarder into mental disorder. Should anyone regard that as disrespectful it could be said that it provides him some pity. After all, it could just be bold nefariousness.
I’ve often thought that mental illness could be the most charitable interpretation in his case, but the episodes of mendacity are too calculating in their cynical manipulation. He is both a Peronist and an admirer of the late Cdl. Martini by his own admission. He has denied the bedrock faith principle of immutable truth many times. I hoped he would finally get a wakeup call from this FS arrogance launched just before Christmas, which placed a damper on the joy of the season for millions. Nope. It was launched one day after his birthday in the tradition of tyrants where particularly autocratic measures are performed to honor the dictator. I believe he is as bad as he seems.
“I believe he [PF] is as bad as he seems.”
You are not alone, dear Edward, in that godly discernment.
The alarm bells are waking up many a faithful & discerning Catholic. Even some of the episcopal hierarchy are opening their eyes to the anti-Apostolic pronouncements. Praise God, they’ll do more than just play politics and will organize themselves to do something constructive to keep the core truths of Catholicism intact until we have a godly Pope again.
It won’t be long for our LORD Jesus Christ promised to be with us to the end of time.
Dr. Rice, Please email me. Doing research on RCism. You seem lije a serious guy. JeffreyLahman@gmail.com
The only problem with “blessing” a couple an extramarital sexual relationship is that this is not a Christian practice.
God is love. Sin is not love. To call sin love is a lie, and the father of lies is Satan.
1 John 4:8, John 8:44, Matthew 16:23
Dear Pontiff Francis:
I am pleased to pope-splain you to yourself: “The Pontiff is NOT blessing a gay marriage, he’s only means that he is just spontaneously blessing people united in the sexually abusive act of sodomy. And he would likewise spontaneously bless any two people (two for now) who were united in other kinds of sexually abusive behavior. These other kinds will include for example “polyamorous unions,” which blessings had to be set aside for later promotion at subsequent “synods,” even though the Pontiff was pleased to see thst they were given explicit mention in his Synod working documents.”
And a final passing note regarding unwarranted fesrs of hypocrisy, because in our prevailing post-Christian, neo-pagan cult, it is impossible to be hypocritical, because hypocrisy is defined as “the tribute vice pays to virtue.” Now that Christian virtue is officially passe in Rome, there is no reason for anyone in leadership to pretend to give it homage.
No hypocrisy is possible anymore. A new PR jargon is in order.
Nicely done, Chris in Maryland.
The one standard that leftists like Bergoglio always fail to live up to is their own.
Sorry. Can’t get past the title.
Lord help us.
The Pope made a false parallel. He’s reported as saying that “I don’t bless a ‘homosexual marriage. . . I bless two people who love each other.”
He then makes a false parallel by saying that this is no different than blessing an entrepreneur who may exploit people. The problem is that the entrepreneur who is receiving the blessing is not even remotely in the act of exploiting anyone at the moment that he’s being blessed.
However, would the Pope bless the entrepreneur while he’s in his office either exploiting people or about to exploit people? The context is critical.
Right-on, dear Steve.
No financier presents themselves for a blessing on the basis that they are engaged in sin.
One witnesses shared:
Francis’ answer to Credere also appears to misrepresent both Fiducia Supplicans and the opposition which it has received. In the preview of his answers provided to the press, the Pope presents a scenario of blessing an individual on his own, whilst Fiducia Supplicans expressly speaks about the blessing of “couples.”
His complaint has already been swiftly criticized by clergy and lay commentators as being a “straw man” argument, for he was defending a form of blessing – of an individual on his own – which no one was opposing.
Years ago, I read that the demons do everything they can to incite man to sin, but when it comes to the sin of sodomy, the act is so heinous, that once it commences, even the demons leave because, by their angelic nature, it is too revolting to behold or endure.
PF, Biblical scholar that he is, consistently overlooks the recorded fact that God Himself nuked two cities off the face of the earth on account of this sin. I beg God have mercy on him.
The scandal is not in giving a blessing to a “homosexual” – it is in giving one to a same-sex “couple” jointly, so as to give the impression that their “relationship” / “marriage” / “union” is being blessed.
Re ‘I bless two people who [think / presume they] love each other’ – some may wonder if the [‘old-fashioned’] reference to ‘two’ is simply the thin end of the wedge for (say) https://www.yahoo.com/news/meet-people-quads-foursome-relationships-223200950.html
See the string of comments that I posted below the article at https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2024/02/01/living-with-same-sex-attraction-in-the-aftermath-of-fs/ to reflect on possible ways to tone down the confusion.
Recommended reading – “I Made a Promise to God” by Regis Martin about Fr. Fessio of Ignatius Press in Today’s Crisis Magazine stop.
For which Jesuit do you have more respect?
I hate to bring this up but what of 3 people who say they love each other? Love is love…
A family member used to work with offenders in a correctional facility . Child molesters stated that they loved their victims and offered them real affection that had been lacking in the child’s family. Usually broken families.
Once you stray from a biblical perspective, almost anything can be rationalized.
Totally legitimate point. What if a “minor attracted adult” and a minor are involved in a consensual “loving”relationship? Would they be blessed as a couple? If not, why not?
Well, speaking of judgmental hypocrites. I just don’t pay attention anymore to his pronouncements and pretzel logic.
As the song says,”give me some of that ole time religion…”
Amen.
It’s good enough for me.
🙂
Walter Brennan as Pastor Rosier Pile, earnestly sang it in Sergeant York while converting Alvin.
The Pope keeps trotting out the straw man argument that, “moral perfection” is not required. It’s a thinly veiled shot at his favorite targets of castigation, those “rigid, legalistic, backwardist” Catholics who still bother with moral theology. This straw man appeals to people’s fallen sensibilities which chafe at being called to holiness and dealing honestly with their sins. However, as others have pointed out, a blessing of the kind described in Fiducia Supplicans, for a morally perfect person, would be a pointless gift. This pope is a theological and philosophical lightweight (at best) and a dissembler (at worst). I literally avoid hearing or reading anything he says anymore. It causes the opposite of edification.
here is a very good witness from:
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2024/02/07/hypocrisy-and-same-sex-blessings/
Correction Francis: To not be scandalized by blessing gay couples is to be morally and spiritually bankrupt. At least it’s clear where Francis stands now.
Pope Francis in the past has denied blessing to the Mafia…..
Does this come under the same category as «blessing» armies, tanks, battleships and other weaponry or car parks, supermarkets and small furry animals?
I’m sure there is blessing for almost anything.
Familiarity breeds etc.
This hypocrisy highlighted by Pope Francis here is what most of us Catholics unknowingly have as a gap in considering bedroom sins from boardroom sins, the sexual sins from the social sins. Most of us have an unbalanced and faulty moral focus which most often only see sexual sins but are blind to social sins. The bedroom sins (or virtues) but not the boardroom sins (or virtues) of peoples are singularly focused upon so much and made the gauge of one’s Catholicity. Who is deemed worthy and deserving or not to receive the sacraments, here about blessings, is measured by the bedroom sins or virtues. The faithful, full and whole Catholic view entails a balanced complementarity of both these concerns: the sexual and the social sins and virtues. To be focused only on one makes the moral compass defective and incomplete. We find this neglected element of social justice in our Catholic faith dramatically contrasted as a reminder in the prophet Isaiah’s declaration that “the Lord is a God of justice” (Isaiah 30:18). On this matter, the prophet’s message from God stands out about making sure that our concern for the propriety of our spiritual life, prayer and liturgical worship (for example, Vetus Ordo or Novus Ordo?) is significantly lesser compared to God’s primary requirement as to whether we have fulfilled social justice (that is giving active care and voice to and in helping the lost, the least, and the last) first before offering our praises and worship to God: “When you spread out your hands, I will close my eyes to you; Though you pray the more, I will not listen. Your hands are full of blood! Wash yourselves clean! Put away your misdeeds from before my eyes; cease doing evil; learn to do good. Make justice your aim: redress the wronged, hear the orphan’s plea, defend the widow” (Isaiah 1:15-17).
Very kindly intended but wildly heretical equivocations, dear ‘DD’.
Sadly, the intention in seeking a blessing is to show everyone in the Church & the world that their sinful homosexual coupling is not illicit at all; for GOD’s commandments & 2,000 years of Christian moral theology are actually misinformed!
By blessing them, PF, CF, JM and accomplices are simply sealing the terrible eternal fate of the unrepentant, God-despising homosexual sinners whilst – accompanied by their apologists – themselves slipping into the devil’s trap.
Hardly a pretty fate for disobedient clerics & lay, and stark evidence of God’s Justice to those Catholics & other Christians devoted to hearing and obeying our LORD Jesus Christ & His Apostles.
As has been said again & again, no financiers ever present themselves for a blessing as corporate sinners. The analogy is specious.
Ever seeking to hear & obey King Jesus Christ; love & blessings from marty
Deacon Dom!
How can you possibly talk about what “most of us Catholics” do or don’t believe?
Who are you to judge? You’ve never even seen or talked to the people you’re spouting these nasty comments about.
Your compulsive pope-splaining, even in the face of unprecedented Bergoglian heterodoxy, has resulted in you becoming a rigid, judgmental ideologue.
If your lashing out in this way is a fruit of this papacy, then I’m afraid it is not one derived of the Holy Spirit.
Those orphans, in today’s society, are primarily children from broken homes (sorry “blended family”), whose parents either never married, or divorced, or have had a succession of boyfriends/girlfriends.
That is what sexual sins do to children. And it is sufficiently widespread that it accounts for over 50% of children in our society. Sexual abuse of minors accounts for over 25%. I think you’ll be hard pressed to find a similarly harmful “boardroom sins” at such high rates in our society. Even the abuse of illegal immigrants here is primarily “bedroom”, not “boardroom”. At what percentage do “bedroom sins” become important enough to merit primary attention?
Athanasius above (7:10) – “minor attracted adult” –
Get with it, Athanasius. It’s Minor Attracted Person (MAP) and it’s aleady a thing. Born that way, dontcha know.
So you’re saying that that’s an acceptable lifestyle?
Deacon Dom,
There are “bedroom” sins of the natural sort. and those that are unnatural. Scripture has plenty of strong words to say about those also.
Recommended reading – Linda Gray -‘I’m glad a Priest never blessed my irregular unions’ – Today – Crisis Magazine.
EVERYONE is welcome in Christ’s House – but it’s HIS House so He makes the rules.
There are those who are aware that they are sinners like everyone else and resolve to work at overcoming their sinfulness. Blessing such people does not signal the Church’s approval of their sinfulness.
There are also those who are resolved to continue engaging in sinful activity with another and the two of them wrongly desire that the Church appear to legitimize that sinful activity by blessing them. Bergoglio is happy to aid and abet them in scandalizing the faithful in this way.
And Pilate said to the Pontiff Francis: ‘I have heard it reported that this Jesus, whom some of your co-religionists say is The Son of God, has given a public sermon, commanding that even if a man looks at a woman lustfully, he has committed adultery with her in his heart. And his apostle called Paul has written a letter to members of your Church, saying that our subjects who practice fornication and sodomy will not be permitted to enter this new kingdom ruled by this Jesus of yours. What do you say about this?’
And the Pontiff Francis said in reply: “We have no king bur Caesar.”
Discovering something is wrong and pointing it out, is not “being scandalized that reveals hypocrisy”. Attaching the description “disguised as angelic” to somehow prove that the worst of sins is at work and is discoverable and should be sought among the revelation, is an undue derision, not shown to be applicable, misrepresenting further what should have our attention. Such statements made in a disembodied way with no actual general pathology are inflammatory and degrading of everyone.
‘ The prophet Joel inspires us with words rich in pathos:
>> Between the vestibule and the altar let the priests, the ministers of the Lord, weep and say, “Spare thy people O Lord, make not thy heritage a reproach.” <<
This priestly intercession is a service to which all of us are called. It belongs to our baptismal covenant. By that covenant we open our hearts to pray with tears for the Body of Christ in all its members, so many of whom suffer outrage. we ask that our compassion may fan embers of hope into a living fire, to shed light within us and about us. '
– Bishop Erik Varden, O.C.S.O. – in MAGNIFICAT, Vol. 25, No. 12, February 14 2024 Meditation of the Day
https://aleteia.org/daily-prayer/wednesday-february-14-2/daily-meditation-1/